Shrestha et al.

Sustainable Environment Research (2021) 31:3 Sustainable Environment

https://doi.org/10.1186/s42834-020-00076-2
Research

RESEARCH Open Access

Assessing air pollution tolerance of plant

species in vegetation traffic barriers in
Kathmandu Valley, Nepal
Sunita Shrestha1, Badri Baral2,3, Narayan Babu Dhital4,5,6 and Hsi-Hsien Yang5*

Abstract
Vegetation traffic barriers along roads can be an effective structure to improve roadside air quality and to reduce
human exposure to traffic air pollutants. However, the selection of the plant species should be considered as an
important design parameter for vegetation traffic barriers because different plant species demonstrate different
levels of tolerance to air pollutants. This study compares the air pollution tolerance of different plant species found
in the vegetation traffic barriers in the Kathmandu valley. Four biochemical parameters (relative water content, leaf
extract pH, total chlorophyll and ascorbic acid) and the dust-capturing potential of plants were analyzed. Out of the
nine selected species, Cinnamomum camphora showed the highest tolerance to air pollution based on the air
pollution tolerance index. Similarly, Schefflera pueckleri, Psidium guajava and Ficus benjamina were found to be the
sensitive species, while Ficus sp., Nerium oleander, Thuja sp., Dypsis lutescens and Albizia julibrissin were found to
have a moderate level of tolerance to air pollution. N. oleander had the highest dust-capturing potential.
Considering both air pollution tolerance index and dust-capturing potential, C. camphora, N. oleander and A.
julibrissin were found to be the most suitable species for the roadside plantation. The findings of this study might
have important implications for plant species selection for vegetation traffic barriers.
Keywords: Air pollution tolerance index, Biochemical parameters, Dust capturing potential, Vegetation traffic barrier

Introduction environmental performance index ranked Nepal’s air qual-

Urban air pollution is one of the major atmospheric pollu-
tion issues that is getting worse with the growing urban
population, increasing traffic density and industrialization
[1]. Air pollution is one of the leading risk factors for dis-
ease burden [2, 3] and causes effects ranging from mild
health problems to death [2]. Around 90% of the global
population lives in places where air quality does not com-
ply with WHO air quality guidelines [4]. Transport is one
of the major sectors of urban air pollution worldwide [5].
Roadside air quality is aggravated due to high traffic dens-
ity, old vehicles, poor fuel quality, poor road and inad-
equate inspection and maintenance programs [6]. The
* Correspondence: hhyang@cyut.edu.tw
5 population by influencing local turbulence and modify-
Department of Environmental Engineering and Management, Chaoyang
University of Technology, Taichung 413310, Taiwan
Full list of author information is available at the end of the article
ity at the 178th position out of 180 in 2020 [7].
Kathmandu, the capital city of Nepal with dense settle-
ment areas and below global average open green space per
capita [8], has been reported to be one of the highly pol-
luted cities in Asia.
It is difficult to completely control the emission of air
pollutants at the source. Thus, reducing human expos-
ure is one of the important aspects of air quality man-
agement. Vegetation might help reduce human exposure
to traffic emissions through dry deposition of pollutants
on vegetation surfaces [9]. Vegetation traffic barrier is
one of the several promising passive control systems for
air pollution [10]. It offers a porous medium that pro-
vides a barrier between vehicular emissions and adjacent
ing natural dispersion [9]. It is a cost-effective and

© The Author(s). 2021 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License,
which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give
appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if
changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons
licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons
licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain
permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Shrestha et al. Sustainable Environment Research (2021) 31:3
environmentally friendly option against other techno-
logical and mechanized methods to mitigate air pollu-
tion. It provides several other ecosystem co-benefits like
temperature and storm water regulation, noise reduc-
tion, etc. It has been found that plants can filter certain
pollutants through absorption, adsorption and metabol-
ism [11]. Thus, plants act as an important sink of air
pollutants [12]. Deposition rates of air pollutants on
vegetation have been found higher than those on the
built-up structures [13]. Vegetation provides sites for
gravity or wind-blown settlement of air pollutants [14].
Furrowed areas of leaf surfaces can provide effective sites
for particulate matter deposition [15]. Moreover, urban
vegetation may also help reduce the urban heat island
effect [16]. So, vegetation traffic barriers with a proper
design could provide the benefit of reducing air pollu-
tion exposure. Planting vegetation for air-quality im-
provement has been well accepted in many developed
countries [11]. However, not all plant species offer equal
benefits in minimizing urban air pollution. Some plant
species may even act as the source of pollutants such as
biogenic volatile organic carbon. Studies have shown
that the selection of plant species for roadside plantation
might have a substantial effect on volatile organic carbon
emissions [17]. Therefore, plant species selection should
be considered carefully while designing urban green
belts and vegetation traffic barriers [18].
Plant’s ability to tolerate air pollutants depends on its
biochemical, physiological and morphological character-
istics [11]. Air pollution tolerance index (APTI) de-
scribes the inherent quality of plants to tolerate air
pollution. It is one of the important parameters that
could be considered for the selection of traffic bar-
rier plant species. It is an important tool to
categorize plants based on their tolerances or sensi-
tivity levels to air pollutants. APTI of plants has
been described with four biochemical parameters:
total chlorophyll, relative water content (RWC), as-
corbic acid and leaf extract pH. Pollution-induced al-
terations in a single parameter may not depict a
clear picture of the situation. So, four biochemical
parameters are considered to obtain an empirical
value representing the APTI of plants [19]. The
gradual disappearance of chlorophyll and yellowing
of leaves is one of the common effects of air pollu-
tion that reduces photosynthesis. Ascorbic acid is an
important electron donor in photosynthesis [20].
Photosynthetic activity is strongly dependent on pH
[21]. These biochemical parameters are dependent
on each other and most responsive to air pollution.
Based on APTI values, low APTI plant species can
be used in low pollution areas as bio-indicators,
while high APTI plant species can be used in highly
polluted areas to mitigate air pollution [22, 23].
Page 2 of 9
There are several studies conducted on the suitability
of plant species to be used in urban green belts [22–24].
Most of these studies have been conducted in India and
China. However, the findings of these studies cannot be
simply generalized over different regions because of the
differences in biogeographic and climatic conditions in
different areas. Thus, the present study was conducted
in the Kathmandu valley to evaluate air pollution toler-
ance and dust-capturing potential of plant species used
in the vegetation traffic barrier along the Kathmandu-
Bhaktapur road section.
Materials and methods
Study area
Samples for the present study were collected from the
Kathmandu-Bhaktapur road section from Koteshwor bus
stand (27°40′39.93″ N and 85°20′58.46″ E) to Sallaghari
(27°40′18.26″ N and 85°24′29.99″ E) at an elevation of
1312–1310 m asl (Fig. 1). The road section is a six-lane
highway that connects Kathmandu district with Bhakta-
pur district in the Kathmandu valley [25]. The study area
features a warm and temperate climate with an average
annual temperature of 19.5 °C and about 1089 mm an-
nual precipitation in 2017 [26]. The main sources of air
pollutants in the study area are road traffic and
industries.
Sampling and analysis
The study was undertaken during the month of Janu-
ary–March, 2018. Six stretches, each of 1 km length,
were selected along the Koteshwor-Sallaghari road sec-
tion for sample collection. The sampled road section fea-
tured approximately 3 m wide vegetation traffic barriers
in the middle of the road to separate opposing traffic
lanes. Different plant species have been grown in the
traffic barrier. The traffic barrier vegetation had nearly a
uniform height. Nine most abundant plant species found
along the traffic barrier were selected for the analysis.
The selected plant species were Albizia julibrissin, Cin-
namomum camphora, Dypsis lutescens, Ficus benjamina,
Ficus sp., Nerium oleander, Psidium guajava, Schefflera
pueckleri and Thuja sp.
For each of the selected plant species, fresh mature
leaves were collected from 2 m height during the morn-
ing hours (08:00–11:30). Sampling was done in triplicate.
The sample leaves were kept in polythene bags and
brought to the laboratory in an icebox (Marina cooler,
18S) for further analysis. The samples of each plant spe-
cies obtained from the same road stretch were mixed to
make a composite sample for each road stretch. Thus,
there were six composite samples, each corresponding
to one of the six road sections for each species. Three
replicate analyses were done for each composite samples.
Moreover, to estimate the dust-capturing potential of
Shrestha et al. Sustainable Environment Research (2021) 31:3
Fig. 1 Map of study area with sampling stretches (Araniko Highway: Kathmandu-Bhaktapur road, Nepal)
the leaves, three matured leaves of the selected plant
species were washed in the early morning (08:00–11:00)
from each of the six road stretches. The upper and lower
surfaces of leaves were cleaned using a fine brush and
distilled water. The selected leaves were marked and left
for 24 h. The marked leaves were cut from the petiole
on the next day. The leaves were put in pre-weighted zip
lock bags and brought to the laboratory. After the leaves
were air-dried, a five-digit electronic balance (Kern,
ABT-BA-def-0911) was used for the measurement of leaf
weights. After that, dust on leaves was cleaned with the
help of fine brush and distilled water and blotted dry
with blotting paper. The leaves were again air-dried and
weighted. The leaf area was measured using ImageJ soft-
ware [27].
RWC
Three different weights of the leaves (fresh weight taken
immediately after collecting leaves, turgid weight after
immersing in water overnight and the dry weight after
drying in hot air oven at 70 °C overnight; Vitco, Univer-
sal hot air oven) were used for calculating the RWC of
leaves [28]. The RWC was calculated using Eq. (1).
Page 3 of 9
FW − DW
RWC ¼  100% ð1Þ
TW − DW
where, FW = fresh weight, DW = dry weight, and TW =
turgid weight.
Total chlorophyll
A crushed leaf sample (5 g) was taken, and 10 mL of 80%
acetone was added to it. Then, the sample was left aside
for 15 min for thorough extraction. The leaf extract so
obtained was decanted into centrifuge tubes and was
centrifuged (Remi, R-8C) at 2500 rpm for 10 min. Then,
the absorbance was taken at 645 nm and 663 nm using a
spectrophotometer (SSI, UV 2101) after calibrating it
against reagent blank. The total chlorophyll content was
calculated using Eq. (2) [29, 30]. The details of the
methods can be found elsewhere [29].
TCh ¼ ½20:2
 ðA645Þ þ 8:02
 ðA663ފ
v
 ð2Þ
ð1000  WÞ
where, TCh = total chlorophyll (mg g− 1), A645 = absorb-
ance at 645 nm, A663 = absorbance at 663 nm, V = total
Shrestha et al. Sustainable Environment Research (2021) 31:3 Page 4 of 9

volume of the extract (mL), and W = weight of the sam- where W = dust-capturing potential (g cm− 2), W1 =
ple (g). weight of leaf with dust and zip lock bag (g), W2 =
weight of leaf after removing dust (g), W3 = weight of zip
Leaf-extract pH lock bag (g), and A = total area of leaf (cm2).
A part of the leaf sample (5 g) was crushed and homoge-
nized in 50 mL deionized distilled water. The sample Results and discussion
was filtered and the pH of leaf suspension was measured RWC
using a pH meter (YSI, 1200). RWC of the selected plant species ranged from 26.4 to
91.4% (Fig. 2). RWC of most of the plant species was found
Ascorbic acid > 40% in the present study. RWC can be as high as 98% in
A part of fresh leaf tissue (1 g) was crushed and put in a fully turgid transpiring leaves, while it can be as low as 30–
test-tube. Then, 4 mL oxalic-ethylenediaminetetraacetic 40% in severely drying leaves depending on the plant species
acid extracting solution was added to the test-tube [33]. Higher RWC has been reported in plants from polluted
followed by 1 mL orthophosphoric acid, 1 mL of sites [24, 34]. The maximum RWC was found for S. pueck-
sulphuric acid (5%), 2 mL ammonium molybdate (5%) leri (91.4%) followed by Ficus sp. (85.5%), C. camphora
and 3 mL distilled water. The solution was allowed to (84.2%), N. oleander (67.4%), P. guajava (55.6%), F. benja-
stand for 15 min and the absorbance was measured at mina (54.9%), D. lutescens (49.2%), A. julibrissin (30.2%), and
760 nm with a spectrophotometer (SSI, UV 2101). The Thuja sp. (26.4%) (Fig. 2). High RWC helps plant species to
concentration of ascorbic acid was obtained from the survive in long dry seasons [35]. In contrast to the results of
standard curve of ascorbic acid in mg mL− 1 and con- the present study, Kanwar et al. [24] report high RWC in
verted to ascorbic acid content per gram dry weight Thuja sp. (92.3%). The observed differences could be because
[31]. Further details of the analytical methods can be of the differences in the sampling period, site, irradiance,
found elsewhere [31]. temperature, humidity and soil salinity [36]. A decrease in
RWC lowers stomatal conductance and hence CO2 assimila-
APTI tion [37]. Net CO2 exchange, CO2 assimilation and photo-
APTI was calculated using Eq. (3) [19, 23]. synthetic potential become zero at very small RWC (approx
40%) [37]. Under stressed conditions, such as exposure to air
½AðT þ PÞ þ ðRފ pollution, transpiration rates of plants could increase. A
APTI : ð3Þ
10 higher RWC gives plants a better tolerance capacity against
air pollution [38].
where,
A = Ascorbic acid content (mg g− 1) (dry weight), T =
Total chlorophyll
Total chlorophyll content (mg g− 1), P = leaf extract pH,
The total chlorophyll content was found to range from
and R = RWC (%).
0.106 to 1.38 mg g− 1 (Fig. 3). The maximum total
APTI values were categorized into three groups
chlorophyll content was found in C. camphora (1.38 mg
(Table 1) as suggested by Bharti et al. [22] and Ogun-
g− 1) followed by A. julibrissin (1.26 mg g− 1), D. lutescens
kunle et al. [32].
(0.417 mg g− 1), S. pueckleri (0.364 mg g− 1), P. guajava
(0.238 mg g− 1), F. benjamina (0.199 mg g− 1), Thuja sp.
Dust-capturing potential
(0.192 mg g− 1) Ficus sp. (0.140 mg g− 1) and N. oleander
The dust-capturing potential of leaves was calculated
(0.106 mg g− 1). In a study conducted by Li et al. [39], the
using Eq. (4):
total chlorophyll content in 823 plant species ranges
from 1.2 to 22.6 mg g− 1. The total chlorophyll contents
ðW1 − W2 − W3Þ in the selected plant species were relatively lower in the
W¼ ð4Þ present study. This could be an effect of the stress in-
A
duced by air pollutants. Total chlorophyll is considered
as an index of photosynthetic activity, growth and bio-
mass productivity [40, 41]. Degradation of photosyn-
Table 1 Categories of plant species based on air pollution thetic pigments has been widely used as an indicator of
tolerance index air pollution, and a decrease in chlorophyll content
S/N APTI value Response shows that plants are more sensitive to air pollution
1 1–11 Sensitive [42]. Therefore, Thuja sp., N. oleander, Ficus sp., F. ben-
2 12–16 Intermediate
jamina were likely to be more sensitive to air pollution
than C. camphora and A. julibrissin. A decrease in
3 ≥ 17 Tolerant
chlorophyll content decreases the productivity of plants
Shrestha et al. Sustainable Environment Research (2021) 31:3 Page 5 of 9

Fig. 2 Average relative water content of the selected plant species; error bars represent the standard deviation (n = 6)

and hence the resistance of plants to air pollution. Air
pollutants like sulphur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, carbon
dioxide and suspended particulate matter may lower the
chlorophyll concentration [40] as the pollutants enter
into tissues through stomata and cause partial denatur-
ation of chloroplasts.
Leaf extract pH
The leaf extract pH of the selected plant species ranged
from 5.13 to 8.44 (Fig. 4). The highest pH was observed
for F. benjamina (8.44) followed by C. camphora (7.71),
Thuja sp. (7.69), S. pueckleri (7.66), P. guajava (7.58),
Ficus sp. (7.29), N. oleander (5.94), D. lutescens (5.48),

Fig. 3 Average total chlorophyll content of the selected plant species; error bars represent the standard deviation (n = 6)
Shrestha et al. Sustainable Environment Research (2021) 31:3 Page 6 of 9

Fig. 4 Average leaf extract pH of the selected plant species; error bars represent the standard deviation (n = 6)

and A. julibrissin (5.13). Plants having leaf extract pH
around 7 and higher are more tolerant of air pollution
than those having low pHs [38]. Most of the plant spe-
cies selected in the present study had pH values above 7.
A lower leaf extract pH can be observed in the plants
exposed to acidic pollutants such as SOx, NOx, CO2
[43]. The activity of ascorbic acid is also pH-dependent
which is high at higher pH and low at lower pH. There-
fore, high leaf extract pH makes plants more tolerant of
air pollution [38]. Lower leaf extract pH may reduce the

Fig. 5 Average ascorbic acid of the selected plant species; error bars represent the standard deviation (n = 6)
Shrestha et al. Sustainable Environment Research (2021) 31:3
chlorophyll content of the plant species and hence the
capacity to tolerate air pollution.
Ascorbic acid
The ascorbic acid content in the selected plant species
ranged from 0.975 to 30.2 mg g− 1. The highest ascorbic
acid content was observed for C. camphora (30.2 mg
g− 1) followed by A. julibrissin (15.6 mg g− 1), D. lutescens
(14.7 mg g− 1), Thuja sp. (14.1 mg g− 1), N. oleander (13.0
mg g− 1), Ficus sp. (10.4 mg g− 1), P. guajava (5.08 mg
g− 1), S. pueckleri (2.79 mg g− 1) and F. benjamina (0.975
mg g− 1) (Fig. 5). Ascorbic acid is an antioxidant that
provides resistance to plants in a stressed condition.
With the increase in pollution, ascorbic acid content also
increases to combat the stressed condition [22]. It acts
as a powerful reductant [44], electron donor, scavenges
free oxygen radicals, facilitates the reduction of sulphite
to hydrogen sulphide and reduces the toxicity of SO2
[45]. Plants having high ascorbic acid possess resistance
to SO2 [45]. So, C. camphora, A. julibrissin, N. oleander
might have a better capacity to combat air pollution. As-
corbic acid helps in the defense mechanism and tolerat-
ing the ill effects of air pollutants [46].
APTI
APTI of the selected plant species ranged from 6.33 to
36.0. The highest APTI was exhibited by C. camphora
and the lowest by F. benjamina. The order of APTI
values of the selected plant species was: C. camphora >
Ficus sp. > N. oleander > Thuja sp. > D. lutescens > A.
julibrissin > S. pueckleri > P. guajava > F. benjamina. C.
camphora was found to be a tolerant species; S. pueck-
leri, P. guajava, F. benjamina were found to be the sen-
sitive species and Ficus sp., N. oleander, Thuja sp., D.
lutescens, A. julibrissin were found to have intermediate
tolerance to air pollution (Table 2). Unlike the finding of
the present study, F. benjamina has been reported as a
tolerant species in a study conducted by Pandey et al.
[47]. This could be because of the fact that APTI of
Table 2 Average (n = 6) air pollution tolerance index of the
studied plant species
S/N Name of plant species APTI (Mean ± SD) Response
1 Cinnamomum camphora 36.0 ± 5.6 Tolerant
2 Ficus sp. 16.3 ± 2.3 Intermediate
3 Nerium oleander 14.6 ± 3.1 Intermediate
4 Thuja sp. 13.7 ± 1.5 Intermediate
5 Dypsis lutescens 13.6 ± 1.0 Intermediate
6 Albizia julibrissin 13.0 ± 1.6 Intermediate
7 Schefflera pueckleri 11.4 ± 2.1 Sensitive
8 Psidium guajava 9.5 ± 1.4 Sensitive
9 Ficus benjamina 6.3 ± 0.7 Sensitive
Page 7 of 9
plants may vary from place to place due to geographic
and climatic variations [30]. It also varies because of dif-
ferences in air quality, temperature, humidity, etc. [48].
The sensitive plant species identified in the present
study could be potentially used as bio-indicators of air
quality while the tolerant species could be used in vege-
tation traffic barriers and urban green belts [22, 23, 34].
Dust-capturing potential
The median dust-capturing potentials of the selected
plants ranged from 0.00026 to 0.0018 g cm− 2 (Table 3).
The maximum dust-capturing potential was found for
N. oleander followed by A. julibrissin, S. pueckleri, C.
camphora, G. jasminoides, Ficus sp. and F. benjamina.
The plant species with the higher dust-capturing poten-
tials help in reducing particulate matter in the roadside
atmosphere [49]. They play as a biological air filter.
Shrubs with foliar leaves arrest more particulate matter
than large trees [50]. Plants have different inherent mor-
phological traits like phyllotaxy, leaf shape, size and tex-
ture, presence or absence of hairs, stomatal frequency,
surface roughness, stomatal density, and trichome length
that determines their dust collecting capacity [51].
The results of the present study suggest that C. cam-
phora, N. oleander and A. julibrissin were tolerant of air
pollution considering both APTI and dust-capturing po-
tential. The air pollution tolerance of plant species varies
with seasons [52] and with several environmental vari-
ables [48]. A limitation of the present study is that it
covers a small spatial and temporal scale. However, it
provides some important insights and foundation for
further research in the geographical area considered in
the present study. Future works might be done covering
a larger temporal and spatial scale and considering me-
teorological and air quality parameters.
Conclusions
This study evaluated the suitability of plant species for
vegetation traffic barriers. Among the nine selected plant
species, Cinnamomum camphora, Nerium oleander and
Table 3 Median (n = 6) dust capturing potential of the studied
plant species
S/ Plant species Dust capturing potential (g cm−2)
N
Median IQRa
1 Cinnamomum camphora 0.00064 0.0030
2 Ficus benjamina 0.00026 0.00028
3 Ficus sp. 0.00030 0.00014
4 Nerium oleander 0.0018 0.0013
5 Schefflera pueckleri 0.00069 0.00051
6 Albizia julibrissin 0.00088 0.00042
7 Gardenia jasminoides 0.00031 0.00013
a
Interquartile range
Shrestha et al. Sustainable Environment Research (2021) 31:3
Albizia julibrissin were found to be the most suitable
species to be used in the vegetation traffic barriers based
on air pollution tolerance and dust-capturing potential.
The finding of the present study might be useful for de-
signing urban green belts and vegetation traffic barriers
in the Kathmandu valley.
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank Ms. Ritu Tuladhar, Ms. Sabita Thapa, Ms. Arati
Shrestha, Ms. Manita Chaulagain and Ms. Moon Thapa for their help in field
and laboratory works. The authors would like to thank Dr. Ramesh Prasad
Sapkota for helping in data analysis.
Authors’ contributions
SS conceptualized the study, conducted laboratory and field works. SS, BB,
NBD and HHY contributed to the data analysis and manuscript writing. All
authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Funding
No funding was received to carry out this study.
Availability of data and materials
All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in the article.
Competing interests
The authors declare they have no competing interests.
Author details
1
Central Department of Environmental Science, Tribhuvan University, Kirtipur
44613, Nepal. 2Nepal Environmental Research Institute, Kathmandu 44600,
Nepal. 3Nature Conservation Initiative Nepal, Kathmandu 44600, Nepal.
4
Department of Applied Chemistry, Chaoyang University of Technology,
Taichung 413310, Taiwan. 5Department of Environmental Engineering and
Management, Chaoyang University of Technology, Taichung 413310, Taiwan.
6
Department of Environmental Science, Patan Multiple Campus, Tribhuvan
University, Lalitpur 44700, Nepal.
Received: 28 May 2020 Accepted: 14 December 2020
References
1. Gulia S, Nagendra SMS, Khare M, Khanna I. Urban air quality management–a
review. Atmos Pollut Res 2015;6:286–304.
2. Bahatola SS. Global burden of diseases attributable to air pollution. J Public
Health Afr 2018;9:162–6.
3. WHO. Global health risks: mortality and burden of disease attributable to
selected major risks. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2009.
4. WHO. Ambient air pollution: a global assessment of exposure and burden
of disease. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2016.
5. Colvile RN, Hutchinson EJ, Mindell JS, Warren RF. The transport sector as a
source of air pollution. Atmos Environ 2001;35:1537–65.
6. Wang HK, Fu LX, Zhou Y, Du X, Ge WH. Trends in vehicular emissions in
China's mega cities from 1995 to 2005. Environ Pollut 2010;158:394–400.
7. Wendling ZA, Emerson JW, de Sherbinin A, Esty DC. 2020 Environmental
Performance Index. New Haven: Yale Center for Environmental Law and
Policy; 2020.
8. Pokhrel S. Green space suitability evaluation for urban resilience: an analysis
of Kathmandu Metropolitan city, Nepal. Environ Res Commun 2019;1:
105003.
9. Janhall S. Review on urban vegetation and particle air pollution –
deposition and dispersion. Atmos Environ 2015;105:130–7.
10. Barwise Y, Kumar P. Designing vegetation barriers for urban air pollution
abatement: a practical review for appropriate plant species selection. NPJ
Clim Atmos Sci 2020;3:12.
11. Singh SN, Verma A. Phytoremediation of air pollutants: a review. In: Singh
SN, Tripathi RD, editors. Environmental bioremediation technologies. Berlin,
Heidelberg: Springer; 2007:293–314.
12. Singh SK, Singh RK, Singh RS, Pal D, Singh KK, Singh PK. Screening potential
plant species for arresting particulates in Jharia coalfield, India Sustain
Environ Res 2019;29:37.
Page 8 of 9
13. Pugh TAM, MacKenzie AR, Whyatt JD, Hewitt CN. Effectiveness of green
infrastructure for improvement of air quality in urban street canyons.
Environ Sci Technol 2012;46:7692–9.
14. Varshney CK, Mitra I. Importance of hedges in improving urban air quality.
Landscape Urban Plan 1993;25:75–83.
15. Song YS, Maher BA, Li F, Wang XK, Sun X, Zhang HX. Particulate matter
deposited on leaf of five evergreen species in Beijing, China: source
identification and size distribution. Atmos Environ 2015;105:53–60.
16. Bowler DE, Buyung-Ali L, Knight TM, Pullin AS. Urban greening to cool
towns and cities: a systematic review of the empirical evidence. Landscape
Urban Plan 2010;97:147–55.
17. Curtis AJ, Helmig D, Baroch C, Daly R, Davis S. Biogenic volatile organic
compound emissions from nine tree species used in an urban tree-planting
program. Atmos Environ 2014;95:634–43.
18. Zupancic T, Westmacott C, Bulthuis M. The impact of green space on heat
and air pollution in urban communities: a meta-narrative systematic review.
Vancouver: David Suzuki Foundation; 2015.
19. Nadgorska-Socha A, Kandziora-Ciupa M, Trzesicki M, Barczyk G. Air pollution
tolerance index and heavy metal bioaccumulation in selected plant species
from urban biotopes. Chemosphere 2017;183:471–82.
20. Ivanov BN. Role of ascorbic acid in photosynthesis. Biochemistry Moscow
2014;79:282–9.
21. Heber U, Andrews TJ, Boardman NK. Effects of pH and oxygen on
photosynthetic reactions of intact chloroplasts. Plant Physiol 1976;57:277–83.
22. Bharti SK, Trivedi A, Kumar N. Air pollution tolerance index of plants
growing near an industrial site. Urban Clim 2018;24:820–9.
23. Molnar VE, Simon E, Tothmeresz B, Ninsawat S, Szabo S. Air pollution
induced vegetation stress – the air pollution tolerance index as a quick tool
for city health evaluation. Ecol Indic 2020;113:106234.
24. Kanwar K, Dhamala MK, Maskey-Byanju R. Air pollution tolerance index: an
approach towards the effective green belt around Kathmandu metropolitan
city, Nepal. Nepal J Environ Sci 2016;4:23–9.
25. Adhikari GP. Road traffic accidents (RTAs) trends on Kathmandu-Bhaktapur
road after addition of lanes. Open J Civ Eng 2016;6:388–96.
26. CBS. Environment Statistics of Nepal 2019. Kathmandu: Central Bureau of
Statistics; 2019.
27. Glozer K. Protocol for leaf image analysis – surface area. Davis: University of
California; 2008.
28. Barrs HD, Weatherley PE. A re-examination of the relative turgidity
technique for estimating water deficits in leaves. Aus J of Biol Sci 1962;15:
413–28.
29. Arnon DI. Copper enzymes in isolated chloroplasts. Polyphenoloxidase in
Beta vulgaris. Plant Physiol 1949;24:1–15.
30. Roy A, Bhattacharya T, Kumari M. Air pollution tolerance, metal
accumulation and dust capturing capacity of common tropical trees in
commercial and industrial sites. Sci Total Environ 2020;722:137622.
31. Bajaj KL, Kaur G. Spectrophotometric determination of L-ascorbic acid in
vegetables and fruits. Analyst 1981;106:117–20.
32. Ogunkunle CO, Suleiman LB, Oyedeji S, Awotoye OO, Fatoba PO. Assessing
the air pollution tolerance index and anticipated performance index of
some tree species for biomonitoring environmental health. Agroforest Syst
2015;89:447–54.
33. Zhang TJ, Yu LX, Zheng P, Li YJ, Rivera M, Main D, et al. Identification of loci
associated with drought resistance traits in heterozygous autotetraploid
alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) using genome-wide association studies with
genotyping by sequencing. PLoS One 2015;10:e0138931.
34. Tak AA, Kakde UB. Assessment of air pollution tolerance index of plants: a
comparative study. Int J Pharm Pharm Sci 2017;9:83–9.
35. Tyree MT, Snyderman DA, Wilmot TR, Machado JL. Water relations and
hydraulic architecture of a tropical tree (Schefflera morototoni): data, models,
and a comparison with 2 temperate species (Acer Saccharum and Thuja
Occidentalis). Plant Physiol 1991;96:1105–13.
36. Ksenzhek OS, Volkov AG. Plant energetics. 2nd ed. Amsterdam: Elsevier;
1998.
37. Lawlor DW. Limitation to photosynthesis in water-stressed leaves: stomata
vs. metabolism and the role of ATP. Ann Bot 2002;89:871–85.
38. Singh SK, Rao DN, Agrawal M, Pandey J, Narayan D. Air-pollution tolerance
index of plants. J Environ Manag 1991;32:45–55.
39. Li Y, He NP, Hou JH, Xu L, Liu CC, Zhang JH, et al. Factors influencing leaf
chlorophyll content in natural forests at the biome scale. Front Ecol Evol
2018;6:64.
Shrestha et al. Sustainable Environment Research (2021) 31:3 Page 9 of 9

40. Joshi PC, Swami A. Air pollution induced changes in the photosynthetic
pigments of selected plant species. J Environ Biol 2009;30:295–8.
41. Pavlovic D, Nikolic B, Durovic S, Waisi H, Andelkovic A, Marisavljevic D.
Chlorophyll as a measure of plant health: agroecological aspects. Pestic
Phytomed 2014;29:21–34.
42. Woo SY, Je SM. Photosynthetic rates and antioxidant enzyme activity of
Platanus occidentalis growing under two levels of air pollution along the
streets of Seoul. J Plant Biol 2006;49:315–9.
43. Karmakar D, Deb K, Padhy PK. Ecophysiological responses of tree species
due to air pollution for biomonitoring of environmental health in urban
area. Urban Clim 2021;35:100741.
44. Rudolph E, Bukatsch F. The protochlorophyll (ide) transformation and its
relation to the photooxidation of ascorbic acid in etiolated seedlings. Planta
1966;69:124–34.
45. Varshney SRK, Varshney CK. Effects of SO2 on ascorbic acid in crop plants.
Environ Pollut A 1984;35:285–90.
46. Keller T, Schwager H. Air pollution and ascorbic acid. Eur J Forest Pathol
1977;7:338–50.
47. Pandey AK, Pandey M, Mishra A, Tiwary SM, Tripathi BD. Air pollution
tolerance index and anticipated performance index of some plant species
for development of urban forest. Urban for Urban Gree 2015;14:866–71.
48. Zhang PQ, Liu YJ, Chen X, Yang Z, Zhu MH, Li YP. Pollution resistance
assessment of existing landscape plants on Beijing streets based on air
pollution tolerance index method. Ecotox Environ Safe 2016;132:212–23.
49. Rai PK, Panda LLS. Dust capturing potential and air pollution tolerance
index (APTI) of some road side tree vegetation in Aizawl, Mizoram, India: an
Indo-Burma hot spot region. Air Qual Atmos Health 2014;7:93–101.
50. Gawronski SW, Gawronska H, Lomnicki S, Sæbo A, Vangronsveld J. Plants in
air phytoremediation. In: Cuypers A, Vangronsveld J, editors. Advances in
botanical research. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2017;83:319–46.
51. Li YM, Wang SJ, Chen QB. Potential of thirteen urban greening plants to
capture particulate matter on leaf surfaces across three levels of ambient
atmospheric pollution. Int J Env Res Pub Health 2019;16:402.
52. Kaur M, Nagpal A. Evaluation of air pollution tolerance index and
anticipated performance index of plants and their application in
development of green space along the urban areas. Environ Sci Pollut R
2017;24:18881–95.

Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affiliations.